Grey Knight Codex pdf

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**ductvader**

VoidAngel wrote:
ph34r wrote:It also says "[henchmen] do not use up a force organization slot". Durrr.

Curse people that willfully choose to read things in the maximally perverse way.

It is frigging OBVIOUS that what Coteaz does, is remove the relationship of henchmen to other inquisitors.

There-friggin-fore:

* You can take up to six units
* The 'For each INQUISITIOR...' rules in the Henchmen entry are removed by choosing Coteaz. They don't exist.

That whole statement is invalid if you take Coteaz.

I'll use smaller words:

Take Coteaz, henchmen now troops. Only 6 troops allowed. They now take up TROOPS FOC slots (boxes, choices, spaces, 4-sided geometric configurations...). Are no longer Elites choices.

If you are normal person with a decent grasp of the English language, game design, and the idea that games involving more than one person are generally intended to be fun for all of them - that's how you read it. If you are a powergamer who plays mostly to inflict misery on others...please go outside and play - in traffic. Now.

If they insert one simple statement, that's all they'd need to fix this particular problem.

- You can only have one inquisitor in your army if you choose to use Coteaz.

You can already get 6 razorbacks if you want them in most MEQ armies, so no problem. Oh, they're too cheap? Maybe that is deliberate because everything else is so expensive (and you're intended to take some of it)?

I have a feeling that these squads, in their current form, were intended to be like any MMO party - composed of tank, melee and/or ranged damage, and buffing elements. That is the obvious intent. 54 laser monkeys is not an obvious intent; and while I'd laugh at it and the guy that toted it to the table, I wouldn't play it.

You got it down pat

...Okay...the supermonkey list...definitely proxying it soon...got to see what happens...my monkies are going to be backed by crusaders though...worth a chuckle...

**ph34r**

Thanks for using small words, I'm sure it helped you not get too lost when you constructed your terrible argument.

I'll keep this really short so you can understand it!

For each inquisitor in your army you may also include a unit of 3-12 henchmen, chosen in any combination. This unit does not use up a force organization slot.

Inquisitorial Henchmen warbands are Troops choices in an army that includes Inquisitor Torquemanda Coteaz, and are not limited by the number of inquisitors in your army.

If you could just go ahead and point out where the second quote revokes the second sentence of the first quote, that would be great! And you would have an argument!

Also your bitching and moaning about MMOs, MEQ balance, "FRIGGEN OBVIOUS" rules that don't exist but clearly we should all play by, and "game should be fun and I don't think this is fun so I am changing the rules for you" arguments are quite frankly laughable.

**Vaktathi**

I'm reading Coteaz's rule right now. It explicitely does two things.

Makes them Troops choices.

Removes Inquistor limit.

*HOWEVER* the part about not taking up a force org slot is a distinct sentence from the inquisitor restriction. Nothing in Coteaz's rules override that. Making them Troops choices and overriding the inquisitor limit still doesn't mean they take up force org slots, it just means they are Troops and aren't limited by the number of Inquisitors. I'm not seeing how Coteaz's rule allows them to take up force org slots.

Daemons are Troops in a CSM army that take up no slots as well, we have precedents.

**Slinky**

I think you're wrong, ph34r.

There is one paragraph next to the henchmen entry. The first sentence says you may take one unit per Inquisitor. The 2nd sentence then says that this unit (i.e. the unit referred to in the 1st sentence) doesn't take up a force org slot.

Of course, we're only arguing about language in a potentially dodgy PDF anyway, so...

**ductvader**

Well now that VoidAngel cleared that all up let's move on to other parts of the codex...

Crowe isn't an Independent Character...anyone find this odd considering his survivability is low unless he is actually in CC. Now it also means that Crowe can accept Grand Strategy though...so maybe these were designed to work in tandem?

**VoidAngel**

ph34r - you are the kind of player I play once. Actually probably not even once - because your smarmy power-gaming stench would warn me to avoid you; lest there be blood instead of enjoyment on the table.

You are unfamiliar with mutually exclusive statements? Really?

Show me how the the statement:

"Inquisitorial Henchmen warbands are Troops choices in an army that includes Inquisitor Torquemanda Coteaz, and are not limited by the number of inquisitors in your army."

can exist alongside:

"For each inquisitor in your army you may also include a unit of 3-12 henchmen, chosen in any combination. This unit does not use up a force organization slot."

AND the core rules of the game. It can't. Your mistake is in trying to force your power-gaming nonsense to be right in a partial vacuum that pays attention only to the codex, and ignores the main rules.

**lord_blackfang**

Vaktathi wrote:Daemons are Troops in a CSM army that take up no slots as well, we have precedents.

Daemons are not Troops. They are their own category called Summoned Daemons, but are treated as a Troop unit. Their wording is completely different to Henchmen.

**gendoikari87**

I was fixing to say, yeah there are other things that can take razorbacks.one things for sure, daemonhunters are going to be the king of lascannon spam.

**Vaktathi**

VoidAngel wrote:
Show me how the the statement:

"Inquisitorial Henchmen warbands are Troops choices in an army that includes Inquisitor Torquemanda Coteaz, and are not limited by the number of inquisitors in your army."

can exist alongside:

"For each inquisitor in your army you may also include a unit of 3-12 henchmen, chosen in any combination. This unit does not use up a force organization slot."

Lets look at the second statement first.

Outside of it we have that they are an Elites choice. Lets call this A.

The first sentence says they need an Inquisitor for each unit of them. Lets call this B.

The second sentence says they do not use up an FoC slot. Lets call this C.

Therefore, we start with the paradigm ABC as holding true.

Looking at Coteaz's rule, the first statement says they are Troops Choices. Lets call this X.

The second statement says they are not limited by the number of inquisitors one has. Lets call this Y.

Coteaz changes A with X. Coteaz changes B with Y. However C still stands. Coteaz's rule does not address this. We end up with XYC.

They can still be Troops and not take up slots just as they can be Elites and not take up slots. There is no third (lets call it Z) statement to alter C. Given the absence of Z, C still stands, thus XYC, as opposed to ABC or the nonexistent XYZ.

**Cerebrium**

A sense of perspective needed here. Regardless of whether or not they take FOC slots, you can still take at least 6 razorbacks filled with people exclusively toting meltaguns if you want to. This is legal both with the pro and anti henchmen troops methods.

Why would you want more than 6? The word "overkill" springs to mind.

**gendoikari87**

Slinky wrote:I think you're wrong, ph34r.

There is one paragraph next to the henchmen entry. The first sentence says you may take one unit per Inquisitor. The 2nd sentence then says that this unit (i.e. the unit referred to in the 1st sentence) doesn't take up a force org slot.

Of course, we're only arguing about language in a potentially dodgy PDF anyway, so...

they don't take up a FO slot? really? so coteaz's rule means nothing by making them troops choices?

Don't take up a FOG chart slot gets over rided by making them troop slots, otherwise it would simply remove the 1 off limit and make tem scoring. The idea is oviously to allow an all =][= army, either way it will probably be made clear when the codex is released, there is even the possibility that they will be just simply put directly into the troops slot with out the need for coteaz.

**Vaktathi**

gendoikari87 wrote:
they don't take up a FO slot? really? so coteaz's rule means nothing by

It makes them scoring at least.

How does the part about making them troops remove the fact that they don't take up an FoC slot?

**ductvader**

Vaktathi wrote:
gendoikari87 wrote:
they don't take up a FO slot? really? so coteaz's rule means nothing by
It makes them scoring at least.

How does the part about making them troops remove the fact that they don't take up an FoC slot?

Then why wouldn't it say "counts as scoring"

**gendoikari87**

ductvader wrote:Well now that VoidAngel cleared that all up let's move on to other parts of the codex...

Crowe isn't an Independent Character...anyone find this odd considering his survivability is low unless he is actually in CC. Now it also means that Crowe can accept Grand Strategy though...so maybe these were designed to work in tandem?

you mean mr. ghost knight. Yeah if he was an indie he'd be way too easy to kill, thus loosing all the ghost nights.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

ductvader wrote:
Vaktathi wrote:
gendoikari87 wrote:
they don't take up a FO slot? really? so coteaz's rule means nothing by
It makes them scoring at least.

How does the part about making them troops remove the fact that they don't take up an FoC slot?

Then why wouldn't it say "counts as scoring"

Thats the point if it was supposed to work with infinite henchmen

A) they'd just say counts as scoring, restriction removed,

B) if they don't take up a FOC slot then you still NEED two units of grey knights, it's an early verson so there are bound to be some bugs in the rules. it'll be fixed if/when things come out

**ductvader**

Crowe is the head purifier...Mordrak is Mr. My friends haunt me

**Vaktathi**

ductvader wrote:

Then why wouldn't it say "counts as scoring"

Same thing, takes just as much effort to write.

Honestly? I'm guessing the intention was to allow people to play non-GK INQ armies.

However, given the way the rules are currently written, simply making them Troops does not mean that they take up a Force Org slot to limit their numbers or satisfy the ability to field an army without GK's.

This is Games Workshop and Matt Ward here, not exactly known for clear or precise rules, editing or playtesting.

**gendoikari87**

Vaktathi wrote:
gendoikari87 wrote:
they don't take up a FO slot? really? so coteaz's rule means nothing by
It makes them scoring at least.

How does the part about making them troops remove the fact that they don't take up an FoC slot?

it specifically tells you what slot they now take up

**VoidAngel**

Vaktathi - your argument ignores the main rules. What is the definition of "Troops choice"?

Coteaz makes them Troops. Period. You can't have more than 6 Troops choices.

**Vaktathi**

gendoikari87 wrote:it specifically tells you what slot they now take up

No, it tells you what part of the Force Org they belong in, but not that they take up a slot. It simply makes them Troops instead of Elites. Moving from Elites to Troops doesn't magically make them all of a sudden take up a Force Org slot all by itself.

VoidAngel wrote:Vaktathi - your argument ignores the main rules. What is the definition of "Troops choice"?

Coteaz makes them Troops. Period. You can't have more than 6 Troops choices.

They have an exception to the normal rules in their own entry saying they don't take up force org slots. It doesn't matter what slot they are in, they have a rule saying they don't take up force org slots.

Coteaz's rule says ""Inquisitorial Henchmen warbands are Troops choices in an army that includes Inquisitor Torquemanda Coteaz, and are not limited by the number of inquisitors in your army."

They are an Elites Choice. Coteaz makes them a Troops Choice instead. Their entry however saying they don't take up a force org slot is not related to what slot they are actually in. Nothing in Coteaz's rule overrides this. They can still be a Troops Choice and not take up a force org slot if they have a rule saying they don't take up a force org slot, which in fact they do.

**HoverBoy**

So if Corteaz's special rule does not make henchmen count as taking troops slots does that mean they don't count toward the minimum of 2 troops?
You know like IG Enginseers and Priests.

**lord_blackfang**

^My face when you WAACers buy your 120 meltaguns / 50 jokaero / 20 razorbacks and then 1 month later the FAQ says "LOL NO" as we all know it will. Are you, like, just hoping that the FAQ will be late enough for you to get away with this nonsense at one major tournament?

**VoidAngel**

Cerebrium wrote:A sense of perspective needed here. Regardless of whether or not they take FOC slots, you can still take at least 6 razorbacks filled with people exclusively toting meltaguns if you want to. This is legal both with the pro and anti henchmen troops methods.

Why would you want more than 6? The word "overkill" springs to mind.

If you are human, and not a power-gaming little gremlin with no source of pride except your ability to twist a rule set into some horror the designers never intended, in order to render a game with other people entertainment for you alone.

**Cerebrium**

VoidAngel wrote:
Cerebrium wrote:A sense of perspective needed here. Regardless of whether or not they take FOC slots, you can still take at least 6 razorbacks filled with people exclusively toting meltaguns if you want to. This is legal both with the pro and anti henchmen troops methods.

Why would you want more than 6? The word "overkill" springs to mind.

If you are human, and not a power-gaming little gremlin with no source of pride except your ability to twist a rule set into some horror the designers never intended, in order to render a game with other people entertainment for you alone.

I bear no ill will to them. I'll just refuse to play them. I will also be only using a maximum of 6 (which I won't be doing anyway, I prefer strike squads) regardless of whether or not it's legal to field umpteen.

Anyway, how about them psycannons? Anyone know what kind of stats we can expect of them, or their heavy and gatling cousins?

**ductvader**

Psycannons...S7 Ap4 rending...

They held off on the S8 because a four shot insta kill weapon is ridiculous...and ap 3 would be dumb as well...S7 and rending gives you tank and troop killy power without it being over the top...its the GK missile launcher...

**gendoikari87**

Vaktathi wrote:
gendoikari87 wrote:it specifically tells you what slot they now take up
No, it tells you what part of the Force Org they belong in, but not that they take up a slot. It simply makes them Troops instead of Elites. Moving from Elites to Troops doesn't magically make them all of a sudden take up a Force Org slot all by itself.

VoidAngel wrote:Vaktathi - your argument ignores the main rules. What is the definition of "Troops choice"?

Coteaz makes them Troops. Period. You can't have more than 6 Troops choices.
They have an exception to the normal rules in their own entry saying they don't take up force org slots. It doesn't matter what slot they are in, they have a rule saying they don't take up force org slots.

Coteaz's rule says ""Inquisitorial Henchmen warbands are Troops choices in an army that includes Inquisitor Torquemanda Coteaz, and are not limited by the number of inquisitors in your army."

They are an Elites Choice. Coteaz makes them a Troops Choice instead. Their entry however saying they don't take up a force org slot is not related to what slot they are actually in. Nothing in Coteaz's rule overrides this. They can still be a Troops Choice and not take up a force org slot if they have a rule saying they don't take up a force org slot, which in fact they do.

that's rules lawyering at it's lowest though even if you do have a point and I will laugh when the faq comes out and says your wrong. the intention is OBVIOUSLY to make an all =][= not something you can do if they don't take up a slot. in either case the faq will prove you wrong or the rule will be re written so it's not worth arguing over.

**Cerebrium**

Are they heavy or assault?

And I take it they fire 4 shots then?

**ductvader**

assault 2, heavy 4...only worth it for purifiers and purgation squads...in my opinion

**gendoikari87**

ductvader wrote:Psycannons...S7 Ap4 rending...

They held off on the S8 because a four shot insta kill weapon is ridiculous...and ap 3 would be dumb as well...S7 and rending gives you tank and troop killy power without it being over the top...its the GK missile launcher...

if these make good rules for gatling guns i'm going to be pissed at the amount of money i'm going to have to spend.,

**Cerebrium**

I dunno, strike squads could make good use of them, being able to hit side armours.

They'll still be best in a purgation deathstar though.

**ChrisWWII**

HoverBoy wrote:So if Corteaz's special rule does not make henchmen count as taking troops slots does that mean they don't count toward the minimum of 2 troops?
You know like IG Enginseers and Priests.

Well, they're still a troops choice, just like how a Priest is still an HQ choice. He's an HQ choice that doesn't take up an HQ slot. The BRB says you need at leaast one HQ unit, and 2 Troops units. It says nothing about slots.

On that note, I'm not going to enter the RAW debate...but I will say the idea of a nigh unlimited henchmen in Razorback army is kind of idiotic....I personally would refuse to play a game against such an army.